OFFSHORE BROKERS

This icon precedesrecent changes in posts #1 thru #4.

Here is an updated list of the offshore brokers vetted so far in this thread, and the results of our inquiry into whether these brokers will open new accounts for U.S. residents, given the current regulatory regime imposed by the CFTC on retail forex trading in the United States.

Definition — Offshore Broker
A retail forex broker domiciled in a jurisdiction outside the U.S.,
not subject to the regulations of the U.S. CFTC and/or NFA.

Group 1

Offshore Brokers That Will Continue to Accept New U.S. Clients

— 12 Brokers —

Notes

Information on platforms, initial deposit, leverage, and spreads was obtained from broker websites. In some cases, this information is not readily retrievable. If you are able to fill in any of the missing information below, please do.

Some brokers offer more than one type/size of forex account (micro, mini, etc.). In each of the listings below, the account referenced is the account requiring the smallest initial deposit.

Several brokers in Group 1 accept Bitcoin for deposits and withdrawals. In the listing below, these brokers are labeled Bitcoin accepted.

It is not practical to show spreads for all currency pairs, for each broker. Instead, two spreads — for the EUR/USD and the GBP/JPY — are shown for each broker, as a rough representation of their spread menu.

Email and telephone contact info is included for each broker in Group 1 for those who wish to make their initial contact without visiting the broker’s website. For information on this option, see THIS POST

Six of the brokers in Group 1 are designated as Trusted Brokers. In each case, the designation of Trusted Broker was determined by a consensus of thread participants — primarily participants who trade live accounts with the broker being vetted. Each of our Trusted Brokers was judged to be exemplary based on these criteria: (1) honesty and transparency in advertising their services, and in handling the funds and executing the trades of their clients; and (2) compliance with the laws and regulations of the countries in which they are domiciled. For some background on the selection of our Trusted Brokers, see THIS POST.

• FxGlory (St. Vincent and the Grenadines)
Note: This is a revised and updated listing for FxGlory, showing their new domicile in SVG, and other new or revised data. For information on specific changes to the FxGlory listing, see THIS POST.

Historical Notes

During the first year of this thread – from September 2010 to September 2011 – we found and listed over 100 offshore brokers who (at that time) would accept new U.S. clients. One by one, all of those brokers – except two – have caved to pressure from the CFTC to sever ties with their U.S. clients. Of those original 100+ brokers, only Renesource Capital and Pax Forex remain on the current List.

In late 2011 and early 2012, we added additional brokers to our List, three of which survive to this day: Trader’s Way, FX Choice, and FX Glory.

Then, for 3½ years, none of the new offshore brokers we found and added to our List managed to stay on our List – again, due to the threats and intimidation of the CFTC, aided and abetted by various regulatory agencies in other countries acting in concert with the CFTC to bring pressure to bear on foreign brokers who would dare to do business with Americans.

Between 2016 and 2018, we were able to add and retain four new offshore brokers: LMFX, LQDFX, Turnkey Forex, and Coinexx.

In 2019, we added three additional brokers: FX Brew, CryptoRocket, and EagleFX. One broker,
Real Trade, which was on our List for more than 7 years, has gone out of business and was removed from the List in October 2019.

So far, in 2020, we have not succeeded in adding any brokers to Group 1 of our List.

Here is a list of our Group 1 brokers, arranged in chronological order according to the dates on which they were added to our List. For the six brokers we have designated as Trusted Brokers, I have included the dates on which those designations were made. Post numbers are included for those who might desire to scroll back, and see what was said here at the time.

Renesource Capital (Latvia)
August 12, 2011 – mentioned for the first time in this thread (see post #992)
August 14, 2011 – added to Group 1 (see post #1002)

Pax Forex (St. Vincent and the Grenadines) – originally domiciled in British Virgin Islands
August 12, 2011 – mentioned for the first time in this thread (see post #992)
August 14, 2011 – added to Group 1 (see post #1002)

Trader’s Way (Dominica)
October 14, 2011 – mentioned for the first time in this thread (see post #1087)
November 15, 2011 – added to Group 1 (see post #1111)
March 30, 2015 – designated Trusted Broker (see post #2808)

FX Glory (St. Vincent and the Grenadines) – previously domiciled in Dubai, UAE.
May 24, 2012 – mentioned for the first time in this thread (see post #1555)
June 13, 2012 – added to Group 1 (see post #1589)

Global Brokerage Inc (US) — successor to FXCM Inc (US) eff. Feb 2017 after the SNB debacle — now de-listed from Nasdaq – as of Jan 2018, no longer in Chap.11 bankruptcy — eff. Jan 2020 a federal judge has authorized a class-action lawsuit against Global Brokerage (note: this does not involve FXCM, which is no longer affiliated with Global Brokerage Inc.)

London Capital Group Holdings plc - LCG Group (UK) — currently facing bankruptcy — financially troubled parent of London Capital Group Ltd (UK) (currently being spun off), and London Capital Group (Cyprus) Ltd.

The Collective FX Global (Belize) — see BDG Financial Services Ltd — out of business

TheTradersDomain (SVG) — hybrid MM/ECN broker — U.S. clients must register country of residence as “crypto” and deposit funds via cryptocurrency — after conversion, U.S. accounts are denominated in USD

The 4-page Offshore Broker List (above), compiled by members of this Forum over the past 9½ years, has been placed at the beginning of this thread, where it will remain.

What follows (below) was originally the first post in this thread, way back in September 2010.

September 24, 2010

Going Offshore to Escape the CFTC

On the Broker Aid Station forum, a discussion got started about trading through foreign brokers who are outside the jurisdiction of the CFTC. That particular topic really doesn’t belong on that forum. So, I’m opening this thread, as a place where that topic can be continued.

I’ll start this thread with a rant about the CFTC (because I have some ranting to get off my chest). Then, in subsequent posts, we can talk about specific foreign brokers, and whether there are advantages to trading with them.

But, first things first. Here’s my rant:

Getting free of the CFTC, the NFA, and the rest of the Nanny State

We’ve been conned — by Gary Gensler, the head of the CFTC. On another thread, I called Gensler
“a sneaky, little weasel”, and I stand by that description.

Gensler set up a straw-man — the 10:1 leverage limit — and we all bravely attacked and destroyed the straw-man, thinking it was the enemy. In 9,000 public comments to the CFTC, we battled against that 10:1 straw-man, and we tore it to shreds; and we said, “If you ram this 10:1 thing down our throats, we’ll take our business offshore.”

All the while, Gary Gensler and his crew were saying, “Gotcha — you’ll take 50:1, and you’ll thank us for it. And, by the way, like hell you’ll take your trading business offshore!”

The CFTC never intended to impose a 10:1 leverage limit on retail forex in the U.S. From the very beginning, their objective was 50:1; and they achieved their objective completely.

The phony 10:1 proposed limit was so extreme that we were relieved when the CFTC “relented”, when they “listened to the voice of the forex community”, when they set the leverage limit at 50:1, instead.

Gensler wrote the sheet-music, and we sang the song. Have we been had, or what?

Many reasonable folks, including several on this forum, have pointed out the hazards of using too much leverage, and have endorsed the new CFTC limit. Which misses the point entirely.

It is not the proper business of government to regulate the way we live our lives. It is not the proper business of government to tell us how many calories we may consume, or how much we may drink, or how much of our paychecks we may spend on lottery tickets, or HOW MUCH FOREX LEVERAGE WE MAY USE.

And it’s not the proper business of government to tell U.S. residents where they may do their banking, or where they may do their trading.

Finally, it’s not the proper business of government to tell U.S. forex brokers where they may set up foreign branches, or whom they may accept as customers in those foreign branches.

It is appropriate for the government to require brokers to furnish full and honest disclosure of the risks involved in forex trading, and to furnish full and honest disclosure of the terms and conditions of the trading accounts which they offer.

And it is appropriate for the government to prosecute fraud wherever and whenever it occurs in any of the financial markets.

Beyond that, the government has no legitimate role, and they should butt out.

The CFTC has U.S. forex brokers by the throat: By threatening their ability to do business in the U.S., the CFTC can interfere with the rights of those brokers to do business outside the U.S.

But, the CFTC has no authority over foreign brokers who operate entirely outside the U.S. (See the Note, below). And under current law, the CFTC has no authority over individual traders who trade through foreign brokers that are beyond the reach of U.S regulation.

The U.S. government claims the authority, through the IRS, to require U.S. residents to report foreign accounts which we hold — bank accounts, brokerage accounts, etc. But, they cannot (yet) prevent us from having those accounts.

The CFTC, and their sock-puppet the NFA, are behaving like the rest of the Nanny State: They are acting like our rulers, rather than our public servants. These people seem to believe they have the right and the power to do anything they want to do.

Soon after we began this search for offshore forex brokers, we discovered that the CFTC (and other U.S. regulatory agencies) have their tentacles deep inside many foreign governments, through a series of nasty, little agreements known as Memoranda of Understanding. These agreements have effectively extended U.S. regulation to cover U.S. residents doing business in countries which have signed the agreements.

There still are countries where these agreements do not (yet) exist — and we are eager to find reliable brokers within those countries who will do business with us. And there are a few offshore brokers, in Memorandum countries, who have the courage to defy the over-reaching U.S. regulatory authorities, and welcome U.S. residents as clients — and we are eager to identify these brokers, and to consider client relationships with them.

September 24, 2010

Some things I learned this week about ACM and dbFX

Earlier this week, I called ACM in Switzerland, and dbFX in New York, and specifically asked whether they are subject to CFTC regulation in any way, and whether they accept U.S. residents as clients. Here’s what I was told:

ACM (Advanced Currency Markets, Geneva, Switzerland) is completely beyond the reach of the CFTC. They have canceled their plans to open a U.S. subsidiary (it was to be called ACM-US), and they now have no U.S. presence. ACM is regulated by FINMA in Switzerland; they have an application pending with the Swiss banking authorities to become a Swiss bank; and they welcome U.S. customers. Minimum deposit to open an account is $2,000.

dbFX is the retail forex brokerage division of Deutsche Bank. As a bank, Deutsche Bank is domiciled and regulated in Germany. But, their forex operation, dbFX, is domiciled in the U.K., and regulated by the FSA. dbFX’s relationship to the CFTC is less clear-cut than ACM’s. Deutsche Bank (the German-domiciled bank) has a large presence in the U.S., and some of their operations (other than forex) are regulated by the CFTC. dbFX (the U.K.-domiciled forex broker) is awaiting legal opinions on whether they fall under the jurisdiction of the CFTC in any way. I have placed my name on a list of people to be notified when that determination is made, and I will pass that info on to you, when I get it.

Earlier this week, I called ACM in Switzerland, and dbFX in New York, and specifically asked whether they are subject to CFTC regulation in any way, and whether they accept U.S. residents as clients. Here’s what I was told:

ACM (Advanced Currency Markets, Geneva, Switzerland) is completely beyond the reach of the CFTC. They have canceled their plans to open a U.S. subsidiary (it was to be called ACM-US), and they now have no U.S. presence. ACM is regulated by FINMA in Switzerland; they have an application pending with the Swiss banking authorities to become a Swiss bank; and they welcome U.S. customers. Minimum deposit to open an account is $2,000.

dbFX is the retail forex brokerage division of Deutsche Bank. As a bank, Deutsche Bank is domiciled and regulated in Germany. But, their forex operation, dbFX, is domiciled in the U.K., and regulated by the FSA. dbFX’s relationship to the CFTC is less clear-cut than ACM’s. Deutsche Bank has a large presence in the U.S., and some of their operations (other than forex) are regulated by the CFTC. dbFX is awaiting legal opinions on whether they fall under the jurisdiction of the CFTC in any way. I have placed my name on a list of people to be notified when that determination is made, and I will pass that info on to you, when I get it.

Thanks for the info. I approached them a few days ago, and they said the wouldnt accept us clients. Maybe I was speaking to someone uninformed over there. I am going to call them again.

It seems as though most of the AUS firms will continue to accept us clients, vantage, gomarkets, forex fs. Plus the two from panama forex-metal, and eforex.

Do we know of any other quality international firms that will be accepting US clients.

Additionally, while I understand the issue with us based companies with international affiliates having to comply with the CFTC. What is the primary issue for non CFTC regulated firms refusing to accept us clients? If the CFTC has no jurisdiction, what could they possibly do? Thanks.

Does anyone know anything about liteforex I could not find any US locations listed on the website. I am interested in liteforex because of the small trade size allowed.

Clint I totally agree with your sentiment and frustration with our government making regulations under the pretense of protecting ourselves from ourselves. Its BS!!
In reality a 50:1 leverage cap should not affect a trader that uses any sort of risk management and has a few bucks in the account. 50:1 leverage does limit how you can trade a micro account if your balance is micro $500 or less if the minimum trade size is $1000.
The new regs as they are now will probably not affect my trading much. Its that dam slippery slope that has lower margin limits, higher minimum balances, limits on trade frequency, fees on transactions(trades), and the big one even higher taxes at the bottom of the slope that has me worried and considering finding a way to move offshore. I know it won’t matter where my broker is the tax man will send the bill to me living in the USA:rolleyes:

I was using this particular site mainly because it has a longer list of brokers (over 300) than any other site that I am aware of. At the end of this post, I’ll explain a little about how this site gathers data, and how their [I]Advanced Search[/I] feature works (or doesn’t work).

I used this site to compile lists of “trusted” offshore forex brokers, sorted by country. For this post, I’m listing only brokers domiciled in Switzerland, Germany, Denmark, the U.K., Australia and New Zealand. More on what “trusted” means, or doesn’t mean, at the end of this post.

These lists have to be taken as raw data, at this point. The brokers listed here may or may not meet your particular criteria for a forex broker. For example, these lists have not been filtered for any of the following criteria: (1) are U.S. clients accepted?, (2) minimum deposit to open an account, (3) payment methods allowed, (4) platform type, (5) available leverage, (6) pip spreads, etc. In other words, there’s a lot of due diligence yet to be done.

The [I]Forex Broker Guide[/I] site is owned and operated by a New Zealand company, and it seems to work this way: the website lists every forex broker they have ever heard of, and then those brokers are invited to furnish and maintain the information which is displayed in their own listings. In most cases, the brokers have furnished enough information that you can decide whether you want to take a closer look at them.

However, some brokers (for whatever reason) apparently do not furnish information about themselves, and this results in a number of bare-bones listings which don’t tell you much. In most of these cases, it’s not possible to tell from the listings even where those brokers are domiciled, or how they are regulated.

This site has an elaborate filter/search mechanism, called [I]Advanced Search[/I], which turns out to be a big disappointment. It supposedly allows you to search for brokers based on almost any criteria you can think of: country, language, regulation, type of platform, pip spreads, etc. However, the search feature seems to search only the minimal data which has been displayed by the brokers themselves in their respective listings, and this leads to search results that can be bizarre.

For example, I filtered the entire list of over 300 brokers with just two criteria: (1) brokers in the United States, and (2) brokers who accept U.S. clients. Obviously, every broker in the U.S. accepts U.S. clients, but that’s not what the [I]Advanced Search[/I] feature told me. The search feature returned exactly 6 results, and you’ve probably never heard of 4 of them. When I removed the “U.S. client” search criterion, and just asked for U.S. brokers, the search feature returned 51 broker names.

Obviously, the [I]Advanced Search[/I] feature is a work-in-progress. It does seem to work accurately when you search by country, and/or when you search for “trusted” brokers. So, those are the search criteria I used to compile the lists shown above.

Which brings us to the question: What is a “trusted” broker? I can’t answer that question, and the website does not reveal how they made the determination to award some brokers the “trusted” badge, and not others. I applied the “trusted” filter purely as a matter of expediency, to cut the lists down — not because I can vouch for the trustworthiness of any broker.

If you filter the entire list of 300+ brokers, to include just the 6 countries I have listed above, you will end up with 6 lists totaling 66 brokers altogether. That’s a formidable list of brokers to phone and chat with. Applying the “trusted” filter reduces 66 brokers down to the 24 brokers listed above.